BTC to me is already reaching peak levels of popularity in terms of awareness. However, the amount of people that really need such instrument in their daily lives is limited. How many people can carry the risk of holding something that fluctuates so much in value? Finance as we know it isn't made to allow the vast majority of the population to take financial investment risks. It's something most people simply can't afford. On the other hand, micro-investment is becoming more and more common these days. We might see an increase in the number of people that own crypto in the following years, although that could be through custodianship via third parties.

Having attended a blockchain conference lately, I find it amazing how many developers, investors and institutional figureheads appear to be interested in the tech, while having little to no knowledge how bitcoin came to be, or even what the double spending problem was. Oracle, Microsoft and IBM are trying to sell the idea of permissioned, privately hosted, centralized and non-POW blockchains. It's as if they want the blockchain without the block and the chain...

In terms of cryptocurrencies, bitcoin really is the one and only viable one in my opinion. Even Ethereum's founder has come to redefine what he means by the term "full node"... The only one keeping standards high is BTC.

It's interesting to see Jack still in track with bitcoin developments. However, I feel like with him being the CEO of a public company, there's only limited things he could do with bitcoin and his biggest venture, Twitter. He tries to push any and all support he has for crypto from a very personal perspective. In fact, his own influence appears limited compared to the platform he's the CEO of. We shouldn't get too excited trying to connect his involvement with crypto with Twitter's scale because that's likely not going to happen. In fact, I think that Jack might be even seeking out different ventures because among all social media that went public (FB, SNAP), Twitter appears to be having the worst performance this year.

The viability of an exchange has nothing to do with it being based in the EU or not in my opinion. There are several long running and viable exchanges operating out of EU countries and EU citizens can have unrestricted access to them under a single regulatory framework, unlike with what happens to the U.S. In fact, if you were to question the viability of running an exchange under a certain regulatory framework, I think US would be much worse. In the case of DX, it's most likely bad internal management.

I think that a useful feature in this forum could be the ability to intentionally respond to threads without sending them to the front page and without notifying respondents.

Such feature already exists in image boards like 2chan already implement this feature since long ago. It can add incentive to discuss older threads without the fear of 'necro bumping' and also when users want to respond to a thread critically without promoting it via bumps.

Maybe this has been suggested already, but I couldn't find such. Personally, I've been advocating for reducing bumping right for new accounts since last year, I change which I see was implemented September 2019.

Now I think it'd be nice to allow for users to choose if they'll bump a thread.

Edit: after the discussion that has followed my thread, I would like to clarify that it wasn't my intention to make it so replies to threads could be made in complete 'silence'. IMO, a feature like sage in a forum would translate to either:
a. Responding without bringing the post to the front-page for everyone, limiting notifications only to past responders and followers.

AND/OR

b. Potentially limiting the bump. F.e.: Limited bump power applied & only bringing it to the front of the board at most, but not the entire forum.

This would be good for encouraging responses to old threads and also not giving credit to OPs that might not be worthy. For example, if you feel like quoting a response in a thread where the OP isn't a quality post, you might be deterred by the quality of the entire thread and would rather avoid bumping it as a whole. Experienced members could utilize such feature to also respond to unworthy threads critically. It would give bitcointalk users a choice on how much they'd want to utilize their bumping powers, and to which posts.

I'm offering this as a service to any interested party.
I'll be able to export all of the members in any telegram supergroup on your behalf and provide you with a list of their usernames and account IDs.

You can request what format to have the data in, or have me send it to you via google sheets.  

1 (one) free vouch to the first green trust member to request such under the premise that it'll come with a review the service in here. .

Price: 25$ per group
Great discounts for multiple groups. Discussed individually.

Need a faster response?
For direct correspondence email all the info related to your request at alani@inboxalias.com and include your telegram username.

I've only seen second hand reports on them not being friendly to crypto... But yeah, I've transfer to and from n26 with major exchanges netting decent amounts with several transfers each week, but not big on a per transfer basis.

The amounts you mention per transaction are rather large, perhaps some eyebrows could be raised at N26, or any neobank for that matter. As a matter of fact, they don't have huge balance sheets, especially provided they have a customer base that is growing, but is still small when compared to traditional banks. So I wouldn't expect many of their frequent users being large depositors as well. Personally, I don't think that the amount of money transferred would make a difference, worst I've hard is the bank asking for an income statement. Although N26 probably has a more secretive policy on that. Doesn't hurt to try though. 

Last few transactions with N26 and me were very recent.

They weren't large amounts per transfer by your standards but rather frequent.

I would really appreciate if someone could help with this. Please? 

I'm seeking to access premium Statista content but don't want to buy a full subscription. If anyone has an account to access the data for me and provide it to me or give me an account I'd be willing to pay.
PM me an offer if you can help with this. If you're new we'll have to use escrow or you can go first.

I don't see strong support at any lever to be honest but some have been saying prices will be jumping above $4000 and say this is upward pressure. Anyway, I don't thinnk it's a great period to earn. Sell of what you can at profit if you bought lower, I would say.

I think crypto would be most productive in creating new value in coexistance with whatever governance system there is around. If governments can't kill it, why not regulate business creation on it and tax it just a little bit perhaps? If legal businesses can be established easily under clear an fair guidelines I think everyone is a winner.

I tried to add an event but got this



Other than that, I think you're following a nice concept but the interface needs to be a little more organized too. I see coins are tracked and that's mostly noticable from the search but the bulk of the page is filled with other events as airdrops etc. There should be links leading to each page, laid out like menu or headers for example.

In terms of stability, I thin gold also carries some risk but definetely not as much as BTC. Gold isn't easily transferable and definitely not used as a currency. As a store of value I think it's better but to be it's still not that of a great hedge against the system because the points of redemption for currency are a vital point for gold's value to be utilized. In a crisis environment gold's lack of divisibility doesn't help it be as useful if FIAT fails.

This is outright gambling at this point. Small marketcap means that a single holder could flip the market to the bottom or the top. It means that there's no maturity and whatever price you buy to it's uncertain if you're going to lose everything or not.

At this point the ICO space isn't doing all that great so demand for ethereum to enter the market isn't all that great. The foundation should be making some plans to improve Ethereum's infastracture in the near future if possible because some long awaited solution aren't seeing the light of the day in Ethereum and problems like blockchain size, costs and scallability are still plaguing its infrastructure.

Why aren't people realizing that bitcoin markets are purely governed by demand and supply. There is absolutely nothing connecting it to a real world entity or person't actions. You can't predict its price movements as you would with an asset on the stock market because put simply, bitcoin doesn't tie its value to a company connected to the real world. It's a currency and store of value used for a myriad of purposes and attempting to predict any of them would lead to random results at least 50% of the time.

Following the community is a good way to get updates. Ethereum has several dedicated channels for discussions, I think the Reddit community is the most active one though.

All of crypto is highly correlated in the markets. If BTC goes down it takes everything with it. Right now the ICO space is bleeding and is not driving that much interest towards crypto anymore so the whole space isn't seeing a price rise anymore. It's a vicious circle at this point.

Bitcoin SV takes a stupid approach to scaling. I think it's just a cash grab by faketoshi's company but sadly or not it probably won't die instantly.